I think a lot of places have tests just to discourage floods of mildly interested emails, and instead focus on only those who are interested ENOUGH to actually bother doing a test in the first place.
Any place that is asking you to spend more than a couple days on an art test is probably going to screw you over if you actually work there. You better get used to working 80 hours a week for 40 hours a week worth of pay.
I think Epic makes some awesome games and I have the deepest professional respect for Rorschach, but I don't think being willing to work on an art test for a week shows passion. I think it shows low self-esteem.
An art test should demonstrate A) that your portfolio is legit, and that your workflow is without hang-ups. That really shouldn't take much more than a day on a finished next-gen prop or character bust.
Maybe there is something chemically wrong with me, or perhaps it is because I got my start from doing contract work, but I really do expect to be paid for my work. No amount of "passion" or "team spirit" is going to to make me happy about working for free. On the other hand, I have found that skill and focus get things done when more passionate people are behind schedule and doing a shitty job.
Of course, there were a few that never even responded back to me after I sent them the test, even to acknowledge that they were either passing on me, or excited with what I had shown. But oh well.
That sucks. I would be pretty mad if I put in a week of work and didn't even get a response back giving me some closure. Really unprofessional on the part of those art directors and human resource people.
That sucks. I would be pretty mad if I put in a week of work and didn't even get a response back giving me some closure. Really unprofessional on the part of those art directors and human resource people.
Any place that is asking you to spend more than a couple days on an art test is probably going to screw you over if you actually work there. You better get used to working 80 hours a week for 40 hours a week worth of pay.
I think Epic makes some awesome games and I have the deepest professional respect for Rorschach, but I don't think being willing to work on an art test for a week shows passion. I think it shows low self-esteem.
Having been in this situation only a few years ago I can say that
A. I spent a decent amount of time on my art test and I'm -very far- from being screwed over here at Epic. Art tests are NO indication of being screwed over by a company, I've been screwed over by places who had me take an art test and places who didn't.
B. I cannot speak for anyone else here at Epic but I've never had self esteem issues with myself or my art. (don't try to make yourself feel better about not taking art tests by trying to label people who do, just give the reasons you dont) I didn't feel guilty about taking my art test and I think they are a perfectly valid way of seeing if someone can match a style that the company posses.
These jobs are a creative profession, you need to make sure that someone can match the style and level of detail that your company is currently doing.
An art test should demonstrate A) that your portfolio is legit, and that your workflow is without hang-ups. That really shouldn't take much more than a day on a finished next-gen prop or character bust.
This would be even more unreasonable since we spend much more time on our own assets at Epic, why would we ask them to do it in a fraction of the time we do and get an inaccurate result?
"3. Interview, if it goes well hire the person as an inhouse contractor for maybe 2-3 weeks to see how he is to work with and how he is going to get along with the rest of the team. WARN them that this is a not a permanent situation, no promisses, its a try before you buy thing."
I actually think this is fairly common with most companies. As there's usually a 30-90 day window where the company can legally just dump your ass with out real reason.
As for me, I'm neutral...if you don't like them don't do them and move on to the next company. It's a free market, the companies can choose to hire how they please. If they find out that no one is doing their art tests and going elsewhere they'll change their ways. If they are being slammed with a ton of applicants then I think a test is more than valid for them. I personally think you should be able to judge an artist through their portfolio and if they don't have enough work or they need to match a specific style then ask for it. I think hardcore insane tests are a little over the top. I did a ton of art tests when I was starting out. Some of my work I later found out was actually used in the companies pre-production of the game. They later swapped out the art before shipping. Still, i found it a little sketchy. So also take that into account. Perhaps, even suggest a contract that says the work you are creating is yours and only for them to critique you for a position. If they hire you then and only then can they use it. My take is if you really want to work there then do the test. If a lot of places are asking you to do art tests you probably need the work for your portfolio.
B
That sucks. I would be pretty mad if I put in a week of work and didn't even get a response back giving me some closure. Really unprofessional on the part of those art directors and human resource people.
There are three main reasons I can think of why they don't send out rejection letters.
1) They don't want to close doors they might want to open later.
2) The unwritten rule of "don't call us, we'll call you" IF we have work for you, not IF we plan on rejecting you.
3) They have a lot of people they're dealing with at all different stages. Their first duty is to get the right person for the job.
Second would be doing their normal job duties.
Off in the distance, holding hands while skipping over a hill toward the sunset, are a stack of unsent thank-you card for their 7th birthday party, and a stack of rejection letters. Sadly they're having too much fun together to actually break them up.
If after clicking send, the phone does not immediately ring, consider yourself rejected. Feel shame, throw out everything you've been trying to get a job with, and make a new portfolio from scratch that puts you're old one to shame.
If they do respond but want you do to an art test. Feel shame, toss it all and start over.
I agree with Kevin. If you don't like the tests, don't do them. They normally have a specific reason for designing the test the way they have. When you run your own studio feel free to make a very easy test and replay to everyone you reject with a heart felt apology, along with a 7 page critique of their portfolio.
I agree with Kevin. If you don't like the tests, don't do them. They normally have a specific reason for designing the test the way they have. When you run your own studio feel free to make a very easy test and replay to everyone you reject with a heart felt apology, along with a 7 page critique of their portfolio.
how many people are they giving these tests to exactly? every other asshole who they think *might* be qualified?
this is a major problem here -- if you're giving away SO many art tests that you can't be bothered to reply to them all, then you're giving out to many art tests, and probably knew damn well that most of the people applying don't have a chance anyway.
"applicant? yaaa sure. put your resume on the pile and fill out a FUCKING WEEK LONG ART TEST"
IIIIIII'vvveee got another question, and it has to do with passion. do you really want people who are SOO in love with what they do that it's by far the most dominant focus in their lives? isn't existential confusion and self-doubt important aspects in human beings? isn't it sometimes important to doubt what you're doing, and re-evaluate once and a while? -- maybe try having a balanced lifestyle, where doing 3d art isn't the *most important thing* in the universe? isn't this the type of thing that creates complex, good natured people?
The stuff that comes out of Epic is clearly GORGEOUS, but I once heard Mark Rein (i think) in an interview talk about how if someone loses their passion, they're out the door, basically, because he's never seen anyone get it back. this is SO simple. Losing my passion (almost completely for a while) is what got me to just change the way I was looking at games. I realized that I'm less of a production artist, and more of a manager/designer/big-picture type. Now i'm back, totally fucking motivated and ready to make weird shit, and I'm working on a project that is RIGHT in line with my values. the only change that happened was my perspective shifted and grew a bit. Now I can do something of VALUE, as opposed to just making props.
without being too pompous, I never got a feature on kotaku when I was painting fence posts at Relic.
...I've been screwed over by places who had me take an art test and places who didn't.
...don't try to make yourself feel better about not taking art tests by trying to label people who do...
I don't actually have a problem with taking art tests, or companies that give them. I have a problem with taking art tests that take a week of full time work.
This would be even more unreasonable since we spend much more time on our own assets at Epic, why would we ask them to do it in a fraction of the time we do and get an inaccurate result?
I thought I read somewhere that the characters in Gears took 6 months each. I figured it was just marketing BS. I certainly don't mind if Epic gives me a week deadline on something I can do in a weekend.
Seems every decent portfolio I see has something done in the style of an Epic game. That is kind of what the portfolio is for. It is the artist's responsibility to make sure his portfolio has pieces that match the style of the places he is applying.
To John Warner's question:
I think if you have a passion for art, it means you have to live your life a little. Do new things, travel, etc. Or else you will probably end up doing another bald space marine and not even understand what a tired clich
warner makes a good point. Don't give week long art tests to applicants who clearly aren't going to get the job in the first place. That's just rude. Art tests should be tailored, and judged necessary on a case by case basis.
having never really done a proper art test, i'm wondering - did you guys who accepted one have had an interview/any idea what working at the place would be like/compensation before handing in the test?
I got my current job after spending over a week on an art test. It was during finals at university and I was doing freelance work on the side, too, so I kinda rushed it and it ended up looking crappy. I was given a week deadline, thought I could manage it, and I handed in sub-par work.
Fortunately our media director (then art director) gave a solid list of valid feedback on what I'd have to improve on my test if I wanted to show I was good enough to get the job. I spent an extra few days after uni/work had calmed down, really tried to improve it, and resubmitted. I got the job.
I don't feel that was time wasted on my part. I wanted the job, I wanted to show I could do the work required, and I didn't have anything in my portfolio at the time to show I was sufficiently skilled for the position.
Since then I have moved up through the company and am now a technical artist. I figure there are just places that you really want to work at, places who can afford to be selective over their applicants in order to get the best of the best.
I could have said "pah, I can't be bothered to spend a week of my time on an art test!" and ended up with no job at all, or some other job which I wasn't so keen on, and I wouldn't be where I am now - working with awesome people on a cool project in a new office at a good location.
I think mainly what an art test does (as many others here have said - and I wholly agree with JordanW's post!) is shows your commitment to that company and quality. When I joined Splash Damage I wasn't considering it'd be a one- or two-year gig and then move on to something else, it was a place I'd been a fan of for years, and I wanted to prove that I was good enough to become a permanent fixture at the company. I certainly do not regret this.
I think the same applies for Epic, Blizzard and id, places like that - if they ask you to do an art test, then you damn well do it if you're at all intent on joining such a company.
If you aren't asked to do a test, and are just offered a straight-up position, then you are clearly good enough already and have demonstrated as such through your portfolio.
The main reason we ask people to do art tests is to assess their skill and creativity. If they can make something look awesome, and clearly put passion into it, then they are people we want. If they can't be bothered, then they are probably not people we want. If they were good enough by their portfolio alone then we'd have offered them the job without the test (there are plenty of people working at SD who have never had to do any test because they were clearly good enough already at what we'd want them to do).
... I have a problem with taking art tests that take a week of full time work...
....I thought I read somewhere that the characters in Gears took 6 months each...
.
I can agree that an art test that's a weeks worth of work due in a week is unreasonable and I don't think I've had to do that before, In the past i think mine were more than a days worth of work but due in a few weeks to a month.
and i think if gears characters took 6 months we'd still be making the game
our art tests are 2 to 3 days worth of work, but we give you a week cause we know you got another job or are in school.
for environment i think its a sci-fi doorway and for character its, "here is a concept of a character, there is head, torso, arms, legs, pick 2 and finish"..(although everyone does head and torso, but i did the arms too for extra credit)
long art tests are 100% unnecessary in every way, no exceptions, ever.
Art test are a situational bases for me. If im casually looking for new work, I probly wont be open to taking a large art test. Especially one that requires a 40 hour work week to complete at production level.... Now if im desperate for work, and time/bills are against me, Ill take any test I stumble across. At that point, the size of the test wont have anything to do with my decision.
Sticky situation to look out for is, getting multiple art test at same time! And how to tell a potential employeer that your considering another company while still showing you want to work for them.
Also, on the dedication subject....I dont really understand that. I deffinately show up to work, plug in my hours and perform to the best of my ability while trying to push my art. I dont, on the other hand, eat sleep and dream about work. Its simply an enjoyable and rewarding way to pay my bills. Life goes on outside work, and its always far more important (to me) than my job. This will probly exclude me from the epic jobs.
These jobs are a creative profession, you need to make sure that someone can match the style and level of detail that your company is currently doing.
Its good to see all the Epic folk coming out and posting on this thread since you guys have one of the most massively insane Env. Art test I have ever seen and you all didn't mind do it.
I think all you people need to suck it up and take an art test if your apply or a job, its just part of the process. Maybe there is a connection between employing people who didn't mind taking the test and creating great games??? just a thought
Is it actually 40hrs of work? Or is it like Arsh says 16-24hrs but given 40hrs?
Whats wrong with being a professional and saying: "This is 40hrs of work, I only have 8-16hrs a week I can devote to this. Do you want to see what I can do in that time, or should I not bother?"
On the flip side, if this is a really important dream of yours, friends and family should understand the importance of the next week and support you in any way they can.
Honestly being asked to do an art test should be a big hairy signal that your portfolio isn't as strong as it should be. Your application is limping along on life support, but they aren't totally giving up on you. Just know they don't have total confidence either... It's probably going to take a lot more then just finishing to get noticed.
If you don't like art tests, then be an artist that doesn't get asked to take tests. If you're not there yet, do the test or apply at places that don't care.
If you're going to spend a week on an art test that is going to get you a job which is likely to be steady and good for 5 years or more, isn't that worth it?
If not, don't complain when the studio you joined who didn't ask any questions goes under after a year, leaving you out of work.
Not trying to suggest that studios who don't give art tests are more likely to go under - it can be a pretty random thing ... but usually there are places which are just gonna stay around, be good and stable for a solid career, you know?
If you're going to spend a week on an art test that is going to get you a job which is likely to be steady and good for 5 years or more, isn't that worth it?...
Doing an art test is not going to "get you a job". I can see why you may think it does because it worked for you, but that's not always the case. Lots of people do art tests and don't get the job. I've had friends who have not only done the art test, but reworked it several times based on critiques, who still have not gotten the job. I've also had multiple friends doing the same art test with none of them getting the job. Which leads to the conclusion that the company is giving out too many art tests.
Also, I'd love to see any actual data correlating art tests to studio stability, I highly doubt any exists. I'd guess that what matters more is the company's overall hiring process (with the interviewing being the most important part) and leadership.
I think all you people need to suck it up and take an art test if your apply or a job, its just part of the process.
Man I can't stand when people use this kind of arguement. The idea that because something is the status quo it should be left alone is insane. Just because something is how it is does NOT mean it can't be made better.
I don't really get what you're talking about, Tulkamir. We give out the art test to people who we feel don't have a strong enough portfolio to prove they can produce the work we need every day.
Case 1: If people have a strong portfolio already, they get an interview straight away - if they seem like a good fit for the company, they get the job.
Case 2: If we feel their portfolio doesn't represent what we need, and if we also think, based on their portfolio, that they will never be able to complete the art test satisfactorily, we don't give it out.
Case 3: If we feel their portfolio doesn't represent what we need, but we think they might be capable of producing what we need, then we give them the art test to make sure. If they want to show us they're capable, then they do the art test. If they are, they do a good job and we get them in. If they aren't, then they've got a portfolio piece that may help them find a job elsewhere.
I don't understand where you're coming from - forgive me if I misinterpreted your post, but you seem to be implying that even people who aren't very good shouldn't have to do art tests purely because it's potentially wasted work on their part?
Studios do not want to employ people who will not be able to produce the standard of work they require, because that's basically throwing money away - it's simple economics. Does that make sense?
It's not like companies are handing out art tests in some sadistic plan to grind all artists into the ground and make them lick boots before they can get a job.
If you have friends who have all done art tests and none of them got the job, has it occurred to you that maybe someone else who wasn't your friend did the same art test, applying for the same position, and completed it to a higher standard?
Sorry to break it to you, but if there's one position open at a company and 5 people apply, 4 of them are going to be out of luck. In the case of game art it will be the 4 weakest artists who will not make it. That's just the way it goes. Same applies to any skill-based job you care to name.
I've read literally every single post in this thread...very insightful stuff.
I have taken quite a few tests and have had a couple of phone interviews and each time, I gain more knowledge then I previously did. It's a very tedious process but I think the reward in the end will be that much greater. I went to school for 4 years and graduated in 2006...and since that time, I have continued to sacrifice my family time to get into the industry. They see how hard I'm working and are very supportive. There's times where I feel burned the hell out to the point where I can barely see straight....but you just cant give up on a passion. Regardless if I meet a studios standards as of right now is irrelevant, what is relevant is that I continue to get better and walk away from each art test a smarter and more knowledgeable artist. I sure as hell dont plan on making a career out of taking these tests...so that's up to me (and every artist) to improve. Matter of fact, I just got through submitting an art test to a studio a couple of weeks back and havent even received so much as a confirmation that they received it....it sucks but that's what it is. Love it or hate it...good things are worth the wait I guess.
MoP, how your company does it may be fine. You may very well have great practices for how you dole out art tests. But, you aren't the only company around.
If all companies followed your three cases there'd be a lot less tests given out. The problem is that a lot of companies don't. Some will throw out an art test to everyone who applies, regardless of whether or not there is any reason for it. Some use it as a crutch in place of proper interviews or portfolio reviews. Whatever the reasons, lots of companies aren't like you described.
And what I meant was that people who the company has no intention of hiring should not be given an art test. Also, before any art test is given out the hiring manager should be reviewing closely the person's resume and portfolio, then interviewing the person. If there is still question, then an art test may be applicable.
The problem is that a lot of companies give out art tests before properly reviewing a portfolio or interviewing an applicant.
Also, obviously I know that not everyone gets the job. There are, however, better and worse ways to handle the applicants. Giving a test arbitrarily to everyone who applies is not a good one.
And to quickly make a comment on this idea that art tests can be used to measure a persons passion or whatever - bullshit. Absolute bullshit. First, art tests cannot accurately do that. There's too many other factors involved while that person is doing that art test for that to be any measure of passion. Second, if someone can't gauge a person's passion or personality in an interview, that person should not be in charge of hiring. Using an art test to do that for you is a crutch.
[edit] By the way, I should probably mention that I have no problem with art tests. I just have a problem with the way that they are often handled. Like most things moderation is important, really what I'm trying to argue for is moderation of art tests and how they are used.[/edit]
I agree with Kevin. If you don't like the tests, don't do them. They normally have a specific reason for designing the test the way they have. When you run your own studio feel free to make a very easy test and replay to everyone you reject with a heart felt apology, along with a 7 page critique of their portfolio.
QFT.
The art test for id took about a week and I had a lot of fun doing it; I dunno, I guess I just like making art, I guess I have no self-esteem.
I've recently done an art test for a company, and it was the first one I've ever done. I was contacted by the company through a reference. They said they liked the work in my porftolio and asked if I'd be interested in doing an art test.
I work 30 hours a week and go to school full time 20 hours a week. I managed to get the test done in 5 of the 7 allotted days, putting about 40 hours of my own additional time in to it and achieved rather satisfactory results with mostly positive feedback.
I actually enjoyed the challenge and was able to make time to complete the test even during midterms week. I DID, however, take a sick day from work and skip a couple of my midterms (which i recovered from with a little extra effort the next week).
It's not really that hard to manage to squeeze in the additional time to create a rather large scene in a week as long as you don't have kids, needy girlfriend, etc.
As mentioned earlier, art tests are good for new artists to the industry and that's exactly what I am, so I was more than happy to accept the challenge of managing my time to create a good piece of art under a deadline.
My art test hasn't resulted in a job at this point, but nonetheless a great learning experience and a nice addition to the portfolio.
I can understand an inudstry vet's frustration with this process though. I'd imagine someone with years of experience as a 3d artist would have a pretty extensive portfolio though.
BUT, if they didn't have the right type of content, style or what have you in their portfolio, I can see how it would be appropriate for even an experienced artist to be asked to complete a test. This thread isn't about doing an art test though, it's about doing MASSIVE art tests, and older and more experienced artists probably have busier lives than younger junior level artists without kids families etc. and it would be pretty disheartening to be asked to do a test.
I guess if you want the job then do the test. I'm the kind of guy that just goes with the flow though.
Yea, I can tell you have low self esteem by looking at your portfolio, EraserHead....haha/jk. Seriously, I'm surprised they made you take one...your work is pretty insane.
CrazyMatt, I actually sent them 2 emails so they could confirm that they received it...still got nothing back. That's the suckie part.
Tulkamir, thanks for the reply - your position makes a lot more sense to me now.
I totally agree that studios should not hand out art tests to any person who applies, especially if they are clearly not going to be able to complete the art test.
I think it may be the case that at some places, the only people responding to applicants are an HR department who just have a stock reply to everyone who applies, and aren't able to judge the quality of an applicant by their portfolio, or base it primarily on r
There is a pretty noticeable difference between various types of game artists - just amongst the people who visit this forum. There is the artist type, who is extremely passionate about art, and it's everything they want to do, their art is their life, and then there is the person who approaches it as solely a career, simply a job they are doing to survive, a grind, rather than their ultimate passion in money-making, team- and task-based form. It's entirely, one hundred percent, possible for someone to enter the industry with art as their passion, and then become jaded or (more optimistically) have more of a life outside of their art, which overshadows its importance as a passion, turning their career into a job.
It's not at all surprising when this is the case for someone, and it's perfectly fine; given the generation of people who thrust themselves into game development over the past 30 years, and given that it's just barely starting to be recognized as an uncommon, but not unheard of and completely viable form of living, it is understandable that there has grown a contrast between these two types, despite their being part of the same goal. Some people are just more fanatical or love what they do more wholly than others, that is a simple truth.
But, perhaps, the case is simply that some studios are looking to hire more of a certain type, with a certain degree of passion. This is almost contradictory to their also looking for people with years of professional experience, because it's shown that experience can lead to jadedness or a loss of overwhelming passion, but considering the love affair between an artist and his or her art, throughout their entire life as an artist, if that love remains strong, if the artist is truly passionate about detailed space marines and large-busted orc women, spaceships and barrel design, (I'm being sarcastic) then nothing is insurmountable.
Well, I guess this deduction applies to anything in life; any passion turned professional faces this same challenge.
MoP: There are also places (one of which I believe a.e. is referring to) who review your portfolio, then decide to interview, then art test everyone post interview (ie. interview 5X the number of people you need, then decide who to hire based on their art tests post-interview). This doesn't make as much sense to me. Using a test as an initial barrier to weed out those who are clearly ineligible makes sense, or to allow candidates a chance to 'wow' the studio if the studio isn't actively recruiting, but if you've gone to the trouble to review their portfolio and interview I'm not sure why you'd art test and use that as your metric at the end of it all.
wow this thread is awesome. Judging by some responses it clear some people have had their manties ruffled by either not getting a response or being rejected.
I think one thing some people need to get over is just because you have X number of years of experience doesnt jump you to the front of the job lineup or even mean you are a stellar artist. some people just float on through amazingly. then when they are asked to do a test they puff their chest and their ego loses control. lookin over our AD shoulder at some responses ive seen is amazing at some of their pomposity.
my personal opinion on the matter is, if you really really want to work somewhere obviously that should be the 1st place you apply. I do think the passion element is tied to it, if you go above and beyone the test, bust your ass clearly you really want to work there.
EX: if sony santa monica gave me a test for the GoW team, i would work every waking hour on it, take sick days off work and pretty much lock myself away. Oh and could I suck some sony dick while im at it to improve my chances? ill go get the knee pads. simply becuase I know they work on awesome projects and I can see my self being satisfied to work on cool shit. when you hand in somehitng you busted your balls on I think the results are instantly readable who really wants the job.
Really, like MoP said whats sacrificing a week to get a position you will hopefully hold for many years to come? when i was doing my week long test it was my birthday which i told everyone to just leave me alone, my car was broken into and a bunch of other stuff was going on. boohoo, thats when life tries to get in the way and you give that bitch a shrouken to the face.
everyone has different views and values different things in life, each ahs their own way of getting it if they really want it. art tests are just a part of our industry, chances are you will learn a lot doing it anyways which is a super dope point a lot of you have chimed on. and there are tons of people who get hired without having to do one, if you are being asked to test by everywhere you apply, chances are you need a stronger portfolio and would probably benefit from holding off on applying everywhere and invest some time in redoing or adding to it.
whew, good points from everyone in this thread its pretty awesome it hasnt turned into a cock measureing competion yet and everyones keepin it chill! hell yea,
Vrav - I disagree with you almost fully. Passion does not have anything to do with single-minded dedication as you described. That's unhealthy, and is more like infatuation or obsession than passion.
And I think that is a realization that is slowly being shown by a lot of newer and more progressive companies. I've noticed more and more that these companies are pushing for work-life balance, and are attempting to ensure that their employees get out of the office and stay fresh so that the work they do maintains a high quality level.
Also, the jaded thing comes with the person's passion is exploited, and has nothing to do with whether or not they get paid for it or work doing it for a long time. Sadly our industry is terrible for exploitation of that passion.
Anyways, that's a totally separate discussion.
Mop - Haha, sounds like we're probably on the exact same page, were just communicating it differently. I totally agree with all that you just said.
Passion is just justified obsession, its why we call love a passion because it leads to something larger than lust. We just call failed passion obsession so we can dismiss with the feeling.
Passion is just justified obsession, its why we call love a passion because it leads to something larger than lust. We just call failed passion obsession so we can dismiss with the feeling.
Hmm, I suppose that's a way to look at it. Personally though I disagree.
Passion and obsession are different things. Passion is a strong or powerful feeling. In the context that we're talking about it that means it's basically a very powerful fondness for art or games or whatever.
Obsession on the other hand involves the domination of a person's thoughts/actions/life with one thing. So in our case someone who is so fixated on their art/work that it actually dominates their life.
I suppose that passion under some circumstances could be one factor that leads to obsession, but I can't see that meaning that they are the same, or that one is just a failed version of the other.
Tulk, believe it or not, it seems to me we're also on the same page, saying the same thing. Our primary disagreement seems to stem from the semantics of the word passion, which Kevin accurately points out. A dedication to art isn't single-minded; when strong it just happens to encompass everything to be experienced in life.
It is indeed a completely separate discussionI think Adam (or was it MoP?) already created a thread for it, about the character of obsession. In that light, don't feel obligated to read the short novel that follows... but to start, what is passion? Regarding studies of the brain, if love (a form of passion) for another individual activates the addictive dopamine production factory in the brain, isn't it possible that a love for art, also rewarding, especially when it's as cool as seeing something come together as a game, is also addictive? Ultimately, it is up to every individual how they feel about their own development, and place in a company, but really, if you have a negative outlook then you're likely to deny yourself the very thing you've set out wanting to amount to, whatever that might be.
It's good that companies are pushing for a balanced life, that's the way it should be; no one should neglect their health, but at the same time, for me, a person who has a grand passion for life and everything that there is to experience, being an artist is integral to the core of who I am. Not to make this personal, as I think it should be true for most at some point in their life... to be an artist, for me, is just as much a way of observing and feeling, if not perhaps much moreso than the actual setting of pencil to page, pixel to polygon.
I think "passion" is too strong a word to apply to the job on an individual basis, simply the art side. The passion doesn't necessarily apply to your exact duty, but varies from person to person; it can be the outcome that you like, or just the process of creation that you like, or working with a team... for all it matters, anyone can draw, paint or model, they don't even have to feel emotion, they don't have to posses any amount of passion at all. Artistry is a skill that anyone can develop with practice, like driving. (I like that comparison: various things to focus on, while remaining in control of the vehicle.) However, to evoke emotion in art requires a certain amount of dedication - it requires the artist to feel the same things they are trying to express, or at least understand them, even if they are inhuman "feelings" like the way a wall erodes over time or why a tree grows a certain way; to instill unwritten history, subtlety of emotion into the things you make, which most players will not even notice or pick up on, but will experience subconsciously... this requires a bit of dedication on the artist's part, a bit of passion.
So basically what I was trying to say is that these more epic art tests are possibly just a way to detect this, and it might all be subconscious - in administering these tests, the company probably doesn't go through a list of subtleties they want to see. There is a basic level of quality to be met by the applicant. But when the applicant applies their feeling as an artist, their passion as it were, coupled with technical ability, the piece will shine; the subtleties will catch the eyes of those reviewing it, without their even realizing what it is; the difference of character is clear, even if it cannot be precisely quantified.
The ability to instill these things can be learned, too; it's an instinct, in a way, that is honed as any artist gains experience - assuming they are curious about improving what they do at all - but, of course, to reach the highest level requires a great degree of passion and dedication to the study of it, the experience of it, rather than simply the creation part. These are my opinions, and if I were to ever grade an art test, pending the future high-paying employment of some applicant, depending on the general level of quality sought after by the company, this sort of healthy, ego-free attitude towards learning is what I would bear in mind.
Of course, anything here regarding the industry is just an educated opinion on my part, before having much of any industry experience under my belt. They are all opinions that I'll happily revise as said experience is gained, but the rest of it, about being an artist, or feeling passionate about life, that's just my personal feelings, and a few things I think ought be taken into consideration during an applicant's review for permanent employment, via portfolio, art test, interview or whatever.
Passion is just justified obsession, its why we call love a passion because it leads to something larger than lust. We just call failed passion obsession so we can dismiss with the feeling.
You seriously need to make a book of these things. Guaranteed best seller.
Now I'm all for art tests for everyone cause i see more and more people who got into this industry like 8 years ago SIMPLY by knowing Max a little bit, and have continued to not further their own education by learning other packages ie Zbrush, and still need to be shown (by me, an entry level artist) how to render our normals). It completly blows my mind. Its total BS but since they have like 4 titles under their belt they shouldn't be tested. F that
it would probably make a tighter knit group of people. ie) new intern "hey, how come the entire art team feels comfortable swimming in the company swimming pool naked?" artist "cause we survived the art test of '09 together. we're brothers...for life."
Passion is just justified obsession, its why we call love a passion because it leads to something larger than lust. We just call failed passion obsession so we can dismiss with the feeling.
Well, at least your upfront with it. That's exactly where I was going to make the distinction. Passion becoming obsession is unhealthy. Justify how you will, I believe psychology will still deem your description as negative and unhealthy in the long run. Both mentally and physically.
At least places like Gas Powered Games or Pixar are enlightened on this distinction. They dont allow the passion to become obsession by limiting work hours.
When your passion becomes an obsession that you only do X day in and out. That does not help your creativity and seeing new ideas. That just allows as others have stated cranking x out over and over again. When do you become the better artists to help the company versus just the better technician getting things done to a set standard? I mean, personally I have the problem now of finding time to take classes to better my art with my game stuff.
That and going back to these tests that are unmanageable. WHat does it prove really? That one person can handle being drunk better than the other? (Because loosing sleep puts you into a state very much like being drunk).
Now you guys are speaking explicitly about the modeler tests right? So what about the concept artist tests? Are they also put under an extreme deadline? Or do they have more leeway >because< they are creating from scratch. And since there is so much about personal expression with concept art, that the passion is actual creating versus obsessing in mastering technicality.
In other words, since the modelers and textures are the "workhorses", these companies like really Epic want the obsession over the passion (but playing it as "passion" to be more PC). For they will crank out whatever is given to them. But the cost being.. the personal touch and distinction that a less obsessed person, but more passionate person for ART versus for a COMPANY or PAYCHECK would provide.*
BTW, I will be the first to admit I'm speaking out my ass. Since I do indie, I haven't had to do art tests, as more "try outs". I always sucked at tests, no matter what the subject.
*That and I know someone who knew the VP of Epic who made no qualms about how they pushed their staff OT, and felt it was justified with what they were paid. For being a VP he seemed to miss all the early 20th century psychology tests about how many hours a day or week a human can work before productivity falls off.
If the epic long art test is something similar to what you would be doing anyway in your personal time, then I would definitely go for it. If it is not the kind of art that you would work on in your spare time, then don't do the test. The job probably would not work out in the long run anyways.
Every company that I have done an art test for has given me no time limit. I usually just keep track of my hours. Most companies seem pretty reasonable with working full-time, and the possibility of working crunch. Art tests have been a great learning experience for me.
Passion is just justified obsession, its why we call love a passion because it leads to something larger than lust. We just call failed passion obsession so we can dismiss with the feeling.
Yes, but a passion for what? Like oXYnary pointed out, is it a passion for art, fame (getting to say you worked on X,Y,Z Game), a paycheck, or being part of a group/company? Not picking on you in particular, but I keep seeing this word being thrown out there, and that companies are looking for "people with passion."
You don't need a job to be passionate about art. You sure do need one to be fed, sheltered, and clothed though.
I agree with Jet_Pilot and have seen it happen. at a studio where everyone has taken a test, and gotten hired, you have no doubts about their capability to perform.
For me, my "art" tests were rigs, and I did quite a few when I was looking for work. Those things were easily taking at least a week. I went all out on Epic's rig test, and took vacation days to really spend the time on it. For a technical position, I see no real other way to test one's knowledge. reels for tech artists/animators just aren't good enough to show you know what you're doing or can do it in a production timeline. by good ebough, I suppose I mean, it's not the best format, fitting all your technical expertise into a 3-4 minute reel.
Art tests were fun to do while I got em last year when my portfolio wasn't as strong. Now this year its a lot different, I don't get any art tests anymore, applied to every company on gamasutra. I guess its bad economy/ I should start over.
To expand upon my earliest post of enjoying the challenge...
I guess the evident thing is that everyone's morals and work ethics differ greatly here. What is right or feels good for some, will not be so for all.
Some of us are maybe too far towards the "work-a-holic" side, others feel that their lives as a whole and how fulfilling they are, are more important and that this is just another job.
Companies spend good money on us(I know some people feel under paid, but it beats the SHIT out of flipping burgers for $5 an hour, amiright?). I think that it's fair that employers want to see something tailored to them so they see exactly what they're investing in.
Most of the modern person's time during the week is spent at work, for game developers, probably a lot more. I know there are companies that work really hard to keep the work-life balance going, which is awesome and I highly endorse it, but ultimately you're going to have a crazy deadline at some point(though hopefully not very often) and you're going to have to go the extra mile. Doing art tests is going the extra mile, it shows passion, intiative and a willingness to show what you're capable of. You have to sell yourself.
We are all INCREDIBLY blessed to be able to do what we do and make money at it. Do you guys realize that? I've been doing this for a few years now and I STILL feel fortunate to do what I do for a living. I see people working at Wal-Mart and Gas Stations and any other number of (in my opinion at least) shitty jobs and I say, "Damn am I glad that I'm not there still, and man is all the hard work worth it to do something I love AND not have to be a starving artist."
I've done some art tests, some have gotten me interviews, some not. Some have gotten me jobs, some haven't. Every time I learn something, if not from some smattering of crit from the people who decided not to (or to) hire me, then from my friends who take a look at em when I'm done. It's all a learning experience. I've never gotten one that I felt was outlandish, so maybe I've been fortunate thus far. I've found all of them to be interesting, challenging and fun. It gives you, or should give you an idea of what you would be doing at the company from day to day. It gives you insight into how much you're going to enjoy working in the style the game you'd be working on is in.
I don't have low self-esteem about myself or my work, I get excited when I get an art test. I want to show them what I can do, I want them to see how interested I am in working there(I never just mass apply to companies). My goal is to knock them on their asses and make them want to reach through the monitor and hire me. Then again, I'm pretty competitive.
We all get to live our lives the way we see fit, you don't have to take a test for a company if you don't want to. You don't have to work in games if you don't want to, hell you don't have to work at all if you don't want to, everything is a choice. But, don't be shocked or offended if a place wants one to ensure they're making the right decision.
Replies
I think Epic makes some awesome games and I have the deepest professional respect for Rorschach, but I don't think being willing to work on an art test for a week shows passion. I think it shows low self-esteem.
An art test should demonstrate A) that your portfolio is legit, and
Maybe there is something chemically wrong with me, or perhaps it is because I got my start from doing contract work, but I really do expect to be paid for my work. No amount of "passion" or "team spirit" is going to to make me happy about working for free. On the other hand, I have found that skill and focus get things done when more passionate people are behind schedule and doing a shitty job.
That sucks. I would be pretty mad if I put in a week of work and didn't even get a response back giving me some closure. Really unprofessional on the part of those art directors and human resource people.
This happens quite often, I am afraid.
Having been in this situation only a few years ago I can say that
A. I spent a decent amount of time on my art test and I'm -very far- from being screwed over here at Epic. Art tests are NO indication of being screwed over by a company, I've been screwed over by places who had me take an art test and places who didn't.
B. I cannot speak for anyone else here at Epic but I've never had self esteem issues with myself or my art. (don't try to make yourself feel better about not taking art tests by trying to label people who do, just give the reasons you dont) I didn't feel guilty about taking my art test and I think they are a perfectly valid way of seeing if someone can match a style that the company posses.
These jobs are a creative profession, you need to make sure that someone can match the style and level of detail that your company is currently doing.
also
This would be even more unreasonable since we spend much more time on our own assets at Epic, why would we ask them to do it in a fraction of the time we do and get an inaccurate result?
I actually think this is fairly common with most companies. As there's usually a 30-90 day window where the company can legally just dump your ass with out real reason.
As for me, I'm neutral...if you don't like them don't do them and move on to the next company. It's a free market, the companies can choose to hire how they please. If they find out that no one is doing their art tests and going elsewhere they'll change their ways. If they are being slammed with a ton of applicants then I think a test is more than valid for them. I personally think you should be able to judge an artist through their portfolio and if they don't have enough work or they need to match a specific style then ask for it. I think hardcore insane tests are a little over the top. I did a ton of art tests when I was starting out. Some of my work I later found out was actually used in the companies pre-production of the game. They later swapped out the art before shipping. Still, i found it a little sketchy. So also take that into account. Perhaps, even suggest a contract that says the work you are creating is yours and only for them to critique you for a position. If they hire you then and only then can they use it. My take is if you really want to work there then do the test. If a lot of places are asking you to do art tests you probably need the work for your portfolio.
B
There are three main reasons I can think of why they don't send out rejection letters.
1) They don't want to close doors they might want to open later.
2) The unwritten rule of "don't call us, we'll call you" IF we have work for you, not IF we plan on rejecting you.
3) They have a lot of people they're dealing with at all different stages. Their first duty is to get the right person for the job.
Second would be doing their normal job duties.
Off in the distance, holding hands while skipping over a hill toward the sunset, are a stack of unsent thank-you card for their 7th birthday party, and a stack of rejection letters. Sadly they're having too much fun together to actually break them up.
If after clicking send, the phone does not immediately ring, consider yourself rejected. Feel shame, throw out everything you've been trying to get a job with, and make a new portfolio from scratch that puts you're old one to shame.
If they do respond but want you do to an art test. Feel shame, toss it all and start over.
I agree with Kevin. If you don't like the tests, don't do them. They normally have a specific reason for designing the test the way they have. When you run your own studio feel free to make a very easy test and replay to everyone you reject with a heart felt apology, along with a 7 page critique of their portfolio.
how many people are they giving these tests to exactly? every other asshole who they think *might* be qualified?
this is a major problem here -- if you're giving away SO many art tests that you can't be bothered to reply to them all, then you're giving out to many art tests, and probably knew damn well that most of the people applying don't have a chance anyway.
"applicant? yaaa sure. put your resume on the pile and fill out a FUCKING WEEK LONG ART TEST"
IIIIIII'vvveee got another question, and it has to do with passion. do you really want people who are SOO in love with what they do that it's by far the most dominant focus in their lives? isn't existential confusion and self-doubt important aspects in human beings? isn't it sometimes important to doubt what you're doing, and re-evaluate once and a while? -- maybe try having a balanced lifestyle, where doing 3d art isn't the *most important thing* in the universe? isn't this the type of thing that creates complex, good natured people?
The stuff that comes out of Epic is clearly GORGEOUS, but I once heard Mark Rein (i think) in an interview talk about how if someone loses their passion, they're out the door, basically, because he's never seen anyone get it back. this is SO simple. Losing my passion (almost completely for a while) is what got me to just change the way I was looking at games. I realized that I'm less of a production artist, and more of a manager/designer/big-picture type. Now i'm back, totally fucking motivated and ready to make weird shit, and I'm working on a project that is RIGHT in line with my values. the only change that happened was my perspective shifted and grew a bit. Now I can do something of VALUE, as opposed to just making props.
without being too pompous, I never got a feature on kotaku when I was painting fence posts at Relic.
I don't actually have a problem with taking art tests, or companies that give them. I have a problem with taking art tests that take a week of full time work.
I thought I read somewhere that the characters in Gears took 6 months each. I figured it was just marketing BS. I certainly don't mind if Epic gives me a week deadline on something I can do in a weekend.
Seems every decent portfolio I see has something done in the style of an Epic game. That is kind of what the portfolio is for. It is the artist's responsibility to make sure his portfolio has pieces that match the style of the places he is applying.
To John Warner's question:
I think if you have a passion for art, it means you have to live your life a little. Do new things, travel, etc. Or else you will probably end up doing another bald space marine and not even understand what a tired clich
if nothin else it would be a good folio piece.
Fortunately our media director (then art director) gave a solid list of valid feedback on what I'd have to improve on my test if I wanted to show I was good enough to get the job. I spent an extra few days after uni/work had calmed down, really tried to improve it, and resubmitted. I got the job.
I don't feel that was time wasted on my part. I wanted the job, I wanted to show I could do the work required, and I didn't have anything in my portfolio at the time to show I was sufficiently skilled for the position.
Since then I have moved up through the company and am now a technical artist. I figure there are just places that you really want to work at, places who can afford to be selective over their applicants in order to get the best of the best.
I could have said "pah, I can't be bothered to spend a week of my time on an art test!" and ended up with no job at all, or some other job which I wasn't so keen on, and I wouldn't be where I am now - working with awesome people on a cool project in a new office at a good location.
I think mainly what an art test does (as many others here have said - and I wholly agree with JordanW's post!) is shows your commitment to that company and quality. When I joined Splash Damage I wasn't considering it'd be a one- or two-year gig and then move on to something else, it was a place I'd been a fan of for years, and I wanted to prove that I was good enough to become a permanent fixture at the company. I certainly do not regret this.
I think the same applies for Epic, Blizzard and id, places like that - if they ask you to do an art test, then you damn well do it if you're at all intent on joining such a company.
If you aren't asked to do a test, and are just offered a straight-up position, then you are clearly good enough already and have demonstrated as such through your portfolio.
The main reason we ask people to do art tests is to assess their skill and creativity. If they can make something look awesome, and clearly put passion into it, then they are people we want. If they can't be bothered, then they are probably not people we want. If they were good enough by their portfolio alone then we'd have offered them the job without the test (there are plenty of people working at SD who have never had to do any test because they were clearly good enough already at what we'd want them to do).
So ... yeah. That.
and i think if gears characters took 6 months we'd still be making the game
for environment i think its a sci-fi doorway and for character its, "here is a concept of a character, there is head, torso, arms, legs, pick 2 and finish"..(although everyone does head and torso, but i did the arms too for extra credit)
long art tests are 100% unnecessary in every way, no exceptions, ever.
Sticky situation to look out for is, getting multiple art test at same time! And how to tell a potential employeer that your considering another company while still showing you want to work for them.
Also, on the dedication subject....I dont really understand that. I deffinately show up to work, plug in my hours and perform to the best of my ability while trying to push my art. I dont, on the other hand, eat sleep and dream about work. Its simply an enjoyable and rewarding way to pay my bills. Life goes on outside work, and its always far more important (to me) than my job. This will probly exclude me from the epic jobs.
Its good to see all the Epic folk coming out and posting on this thread since you guys have one of the most massively insane Env. Art test I have ever seen and you all didn't mind do it.
I think all you people need to suck it up and take an art test if your apply or a job, its just part of the process. Maybe there is a connection between employing people who didn't mind taking the test and creating great games??? just a thought
Whats wrong with being a professional and saying: "This is 40hrs of work, I only have 8-16hrs a week I can devote to this. Do you want to see what I can do in that time, or should I not bother?"
On the flip side, if this is a really important dream of yours, friends and family should understand the importance of the next week and support you in any way they can.
Honestly being asked to do an art test should be a big hairy signal that your portfolio isn't as strong as it should be. Your application is limping along on life support, but they aren't totally giving up on you. Just know they don't have total confidence either... It's probably going to take a lot more then just finishing to get noticed.
If you don't like art tests, then be an artist that doesn't get asked to take tests. If you're not there yet, do the test or apply at places that don't care.
If you're going to spend a week on an art test that is going to get you a job which is likely to be steady and good for 5 years or more, isn't that worth it?
If not, don't complain when the studio you joined who didn't ask any questions goes under after a year, leaving you out of work.
Not trying to suggest that studios who don't give art tests are more likely to go under - it can be a pretty random thing ... but usually there are places which are just gonna stay around, be good and stable for a solid career, you know?
Doing an art test is not going to "get you a job". I can see why you may think it does because it worked for you, but that's not always the case. Lots of people do art tests and don't get the job. I've had friends who have not only done the art test, but reworked it several times based on critiques, who still have not gotten the job. I've also had multiple friends doing the same art test with none of them getting the job. Which leads to the conclusion that the company is giving out too many art tests.
Also, I'd love to see any actual data correlating art tests to studio stability, I highly doubt any exists. I'd guess that what matters more is the company's overall hiring process (with the interviewing being the most important part) and leadership.
Man I can't stand when people use this kind of arguement. The idea that because something is the status quo it should be left alone is insane. Just because something is how it is does NOT mean it can't be made better.
Case 1: If people have a strong portfolio already, they get an interview straight away - if they seem like a good fit for the company, they get the job.
Case 2: If we feel their portfolio doesn't represent what we need, and if we also think, based on their portfolio, that they will never be able to complete the art test satisfactorily, we don't give it out.
Case 3: If we feel their portfolio doesn't represent what we need, but we think they might be capable of producing what we need, then we give them the art test to make sure. If they want to show us they're capable, then they do the art test. If they are, they do a good job and we get them in. If they aren't, then they've got a portfolio piece that may help them find a job elsewhere.
I don't understand where you're coming from - forgive me if I misinterpreted your post, but you seem to be implying that even people who aren't very good shouldn't have to do art tests purely because it's potentially wasted work on their part?
Studios do not want to employ people who will not be able to produce the standard of work they require, because that's basically throwing money away - it's simple economics. Does that make sense?
It's not like companies are handing out art tests in some sadistic plan to grind all artists into the ground and make them lick boots before they can get a job.
If you have friends who have all done art tests and none of them got the job, has it occurred to you that maybe someone else who wasn't your friend did the same art test, applying for the same position, and completed it to a higher standard?
Sorry to break it to you, but if there's one position open at a company and 5 people apply, 4 of them are going to be out of luck. In the case of game art it will be the 4 weakest artists who will not make it. That's just the way it goes. Same applies to any skill-based job you care to name.
I have taken quite a few tests and have had a couple of phone interviews and each time, I gain more knowledge then I previously did. It's a very tedious process but I think the reward in the end will be that much greater. I went to school for 4 years and graduated in 2006...and since that time, I have continued to sacrifice my family time to get into the industry. They see how hard I'm working and are very supportive. There's times where I feel burned the hell out to the point where I can barely see straight....but you just cant give up on a passion. Regardless if I meet a studios standards as of right now is irrelevant, what is relevant is that I continue to get better and walk away from each art test a smarter and more knowledgeable artist. I sure as hell dont plan on making a career out of taking these tests...so that's up to me (and every artist) to improve. Matter of fact, I just got through submitting an art test to a studio a couple of weeks back and havent even received so much as a confirmation that they received it....it sucks but that's what it is. Love it or hate it...good things are worth the wait I guess.
But @NyneDown, I would email them in asking for a confirmation that they recieved it.
If all companies followed your three cases there'd be a lot less tests given out. The problem is that a lot of companies don't. Some will throw out an art test to everyone who applies, regardless of whether or not there is any reason for it. Some use it as a crutch in place of proper interviews or portfolio reviews. Whatever the reasons, lots of companies aren't like you described.
And what I meant was that people who the company has no intention of hiring should not be given an art test. Also, before any art test is given out the hiring manager should be reviewing closely the person's resume and portfolio, then interviewing the person. If there is still question, then an art test may be applicable.
The problem is that a lot of companies give out art tests before properly reviewing a portfolio or interviewing an applicant.
Also, obviously I know that not everyone gets the job. There are, however, better and worse ways to handle the applicants. Giving a test arbitrarily to everyone who applies is not a good one.
And to quickly make a comment on this idea that art tests can be used to measure a persons passion or whatever - bullshit. Absolute bullshit. First, art tests cannot accurately do that. There's too many other factors involved while that person is doing that art test for that to be any measure of passion. Second, if someone can't gauge a person's passion or personality in an interview, that person should not be in charge of hiring. Using an art test to do that for you is a crutch.
[edit] By the way, I should probably mention that I have no problem with art tests. I just have a problem with the way that they are often handled. Like most things moderation is important, really what I'm trying to argue for is moderation of art tests and how they are used.[/edit]
QFT.
The art test for id took about a week and I had a lot of fun doing it; I dunno, I guess I just like making art, I guess I have no self-esteem.
I work 30 hours a week and go to school full time 20 hours a week. I managed to get the test done in 5 of the 7 allotted days, putting about 40 hours of my own additional time in to it and achieved rather satisfactory results with mostly positive feedback.
I actually enjoyed the challenge and was able to make time to complete the test even during midterms week. I DID, however, take a sick day from work and skip a couple of my midterms (which i recovered from with a little extra effort the next week).
It's not really that hard to manage to squeeze in the additional time to create a rather large scene in a week as long as you don't have kids, needy girlfriend, etc.
As mentioned earlier, art tests are good for new artists to the industry and that's exactly what I am, so I was more than happy to accept the challenge of managing my time to create a good piece of art under a deadline.
My art test hasn't resulted in a job at this point, but nonetheless a great learning experience and a nice addition to the portfolio.
I can understand an inudstry vet's frustration with this process though. I'd imagine someone with years of experience as a 3d artist would have a pretty extensive portfolio though.
BUT, if they didn't have the right type of content, style or what have you in their portfolio, I can see how it would be appropriate for even an experienced artist to be asked to complete a test. This thread isn't about doing an art test though, it's about doing MASSIVE art tests, and older and more experienced artists probably have busier lives than younger junior level artists without kids families etc. and it would be pretty disheartening to be asked to do a test.
I guess if you want the job then do the test. I'm the kind of guy that just goes with the flow though.
CrazyMatt, I actually sent them 2 emails so they could confirm that they received it...still got nothing back. That's the suckie part.
I totally agree that studios should not hand out art tests to any person who applies, especially if they are clearly not going to be able to complete the art test.
I think it may be the case that at some places, the only people responding to applicants are an HR department who just have a stock reply to everyone who applies, and aren't able to judge the quality of an applicant by their portfolio, or base it primarily on r
It's not at all surprising when this is the case for someone, and it's perfectly fine; given the generation of people who thrust themselves into game development over the past 30 years, and given that it's just barely starting to be recognized as an uncommon, but not unheard of and completely viable form of living, it is understandable that there has grown a contrast between these two types, despite their being part of the same goal. Some people are just more fanatical or love what they do more wholly than others, that is a simple truth.
But, perhaps, the case is simply that some studios are looking to hire more of a certain type, with a certain degree of passion. This is almost contradictory to their also looking for people with years of professional experience, because it's shown that experience can lead to jadedness or a loss of overwhelming passion, but considering the love affair between an artist and his or her art, throughout their entire life as an artist, if that love remains strong, if the artist is truly passionate about detailed space marines and large-busted orc women, spaceships and barrel design, (I'm being sarcastic) then nothing is insurmountable.
Well, I guess this deduction applies to anything in life; any passion turned professional faces this same challenge.
I think one thing some people need to get over is just because you have X number of years of experience doesnt jump you to the front of the job lineup or even mean you are a stellar artist. some people just float on through amazingly. then when they are asked to do a test they puff their chest and their ego loses control. lookin over our AD shoulder at some responses ive seen is amazing at some of their pomposity.
my personal opinion on the matter is, if you really really want to work somewhere obviously that should be the 1st place you apply. I do think the passion element is tied to it, if you go above and beyone the test, bust your ass clearly you really want to work there.
EX: if sony santa monica gave me a test for the GoW team, i would work every waking hour on it, take sick days off work and pretty much lock myself away. Oh and could I suck some sony dick while im at it to improve my chances? ill go get the knee pads. simply becuase I know they work on awesome projects and I can see my self being satisfied to work on cool shit. when you hand in somehitng you busted your balls on I think the results are instantly readable who really wants the job.
Really, like MoP said whats sacrificing a week to get a position you will hopefully hold for many years to come? when i was doing my week long test it was my birthday which i told everyone to just leave me alone, my car was broken into and a bunch of other stuff was going on. boohoo, thats when life tries to get in the way and you give that bitch a shrouken to the face.
everyone has different views and values different things in life, each ahs their own way of getting it if they really want it. art tests are just a part of our industry, chances are you will learn a lot doing it anyways which is a super dope point a lot of you have chimed on. and there are tons of people who get hired without having to do one, if you are being asked to test by everywhere you apply, chances are you need a stronger portfolio and would probably benefit from holding off on applying everywhere and invest some time in redoing or adding to it.
whew, good points from everyone in this thread its pretty awesome it hasnt turned into a cock measureing competion yet and everyones keepin it chill! hell yea,
cheers dudes.
And I think that is a realization that is slowly being shown by a lot of newer and more progressive companies. I've noticed more and more that these companies are pushing for work-life balance, and are attempting to ensure that their employees get out of the office and stay fresh so that the work they do maintains a high quality level.
Also, the jaded thing comes with the person's passion is exploited, and has nothing to do with whether or not they get paid for it or work doing it for a long time. Sadly our industry is terrible for exploitation of that passion.
Anyways, that's a totally separate discussion.
Mop - Haha, sounds like we're probably on the exact same page, were just communicating it differently.
Hmm, I suppose that's a way to look at it. Personally though I disagree.
Passion and obsession are different things. Passion is a strong or powerful feeling. In the context that we're talking about it that means it's basically a very powerful fondness for art or games or whatever.
Obsession on the other hand involves the domination of a person's thoughts/actions/life with one thing. So in our case someone who is so fixated on their art/work that it actually dominates their life.
I suppose that passion under some circumstances could be one factor that leads to obsession, but I can't see that meaning that they are the same, or that one is just a failed version of the other.
It is indeed a completely separate discussionI think Adam (or was it MoP?) already created a thread for it, about the character of obsession. In that light, don't feel obligated to read the short novel that follows... but to start, what is passion? Regarding studies of the brain, if love (a form of passion) for another individual activates the addictive dopamine production factory in the brain, isn't it possible that a love for art, also rewarding, especially when it's as cool as seeing something come together as a game, is also addictive? Ultimately, it is up to every individual how they feel about their own development, and place in a company, but really, if you have a negative outlook then you're likely to deny yourself the very thing you've set out wanting to amount to, whatever that might be.
It's good that companies are pushing for a balanced life, that's the way it should be; no one should neglect their health, but at the same time, for me, a person who has a grand passion for life and everything that there is to experience, being an artist is integral to the core of who I am. Not to make this personal, as I think it should be true for most at some point in their life... to be an artist, for me, is just as much a way of observing and feeling, if not perhaps much moreso than the actual setting of pencil to page, pixel to polygon.
I think "passion" is too strong a word to apply to the job on an individual basis, simply the art side. The passion doesn't necessarily apply to your exact duty, but varies from person to person; it can be the outcome that you like, or just the process of creation that you like, or working with a team... for all it matters, anyone can draw, paint or model, they don't even have to feel emotion, they don't have to posses any amount of passion at all. Artistry is a skill that anyone can develop with practice, like driving. (I like that comparison: various things to focus on, while remaining in control of the vehicle.) However, to evoke emotion in art requires a certain amount of dedication - it requires the artist to feel the same things they are trying to express, or at least understand them, even if they are inhuman "feelings" like the way a wall erodes over time or why a tree grows a certain way; to instill unwritten history, subtlety of emotion into the things you make, which most players will not even notice or pick up on, but will experience subconsciously... this requires a bit of dedication on the artist's part, a bit of passion.
So basically what I was trying to say is that these more epic art tests are possibly just a way to detect this, and it might all be subconscious - in administering these tests, the company probably doesn't go through a list of subtleties they want to see. There is a basic level of quality to be met by the applicant. But when the applicant applies their feeling as an artist, their passion as it were, coupled with technical ability, the piece will shine; the subtleties will catch the eyes of those reviewing it, without their even realizing what it is; the difference of character is clear, even if it cannot be precisely quantified.
The ability to instill these things can be learned, too; it's an instinct, in a way, that is honed as any artist gains experience - assuming they are curious about improving what they do at all - but, of course, to reach the highest level requires a great degree of passion and dedication to the study of it, the experience of it, rather than simply the creation part. These are my opinions, and if I were to ever grade an art test, pending the future high-paying employment of some applicant, depending on the general level of quality sought after by the company, this sort of healthy, ego-free attitude towards learning is what I would bear in mind.
Of course, anything here regarding the industry is just an educated opinion on my part, before having much of any industry experience under my belt. They are all opinions that I'll happily revise as said experience is gained, but the rest of it, about being an artist, or feeling passionate about life, that's just my personal feelings, and a few things I think ought be taken into consideration during an applicant's review for permanent employment, via portfolio, art test, interview or whatever.
You seriously need to make a book of these things. Guaranteed best seller.
imagine every studio required art tests for all qualified applicants. that would be interesting. I wonder how it would effect stuff. and things.
Well, at least your upfront with it. That's exactly where I was going to make the distinction. Passion becoming obsession is unhealthy. Justify how you will, I believe psychology will still deem your description as negative and unhealthy in the long run. Both mentally and physically.
At least places like Gas Powered Games or Pixar are enlightened on this distinction. They dont allow the passion to become obsession by limiting work hours.
When your passion becomes an obsession that you only do X day in and out. That does not help your creativity and seeing new ideas. That just allows as others have stated cranking x out over and over again. When do you become the better artists to help the company versus just the better technician getting things done to a set standard? I mean, personally I have the problem now of finding time to take classes to better my art with my game stuff.
That and going back to these tests that are unmanageable. WHat does it prove really? That one person can handle being drunk better than the other? (Because loosing sleep puts you into a state very much like being drunk).
Now you guys are speaking explicitly about the modeler tests right? So what about the concept artist tests? Are they also put under an extreme deadline? Or do they have more leeway >because< they are creating from scratch. And since there is so much about personal expression with concept art, that the passion is actual creating versus obsessing in mastering technicality.
In other words, since the modelers and textures are the "workhorses", these companies like really Epic want the obsession over the passion (but playing it as "passion" to be more PC). For they will crank out whatever is given to them. But the cost being.. the personal touch and distinction that a less obsessed person, but more passionate person for ART versus for a COMPANY or PAYCHECK would provide.*
BTW, I will be the first to admit I'm speaking out my ass. Since I do indie, I haven't had to do art tests, as more "try outs". I always sucked at tests, no matter what the subject.
*That and I know someone who knew the VP of Epic who made no qualms about how they pushed their staff OT, and felt it was justified with what they were paid. For being a VP he seemed to miss all the early 20th century psychology tests about how many hours a day or week a human can work before productivity falls off.
Every company that I have done an art test for has given me no time limit. I usually just keep track of my hours. Most companies seem pretty reasonable with working full-time, and the possibility of working crunch. Art tests have been a great learning experience for me.
Yes, but a passion for what? Like oXYnary pointed out, is it a passion for art, fame (getting to say you worked on X,Y,Z Game), a paycheck, or being part of a group/company? Not picking on you in particular, but I keep seeing this word being thrown out there, and that companies are looking for "people with passion."
You don't need a job to be passionate about art. You sure do need one to be fed, sheltered, and clothed though.
For me, my "art" tests were rigs, and I did quite a few when I was looking for work. Those things were easily taking at least a week. I went all out on Epic's rig test, and took vacation days to really spend the time on it. For a technical position, I see no real other way to test one's knowledge. reels for tech artists/animators just aren't good enough to show you know what you're doing or can do it in a production timeline. by good ebough, I suppose I mean, it's not the best format, fitting all your technical expertise into a 3-4 minute reel.
I guess the evident thing is that everyone's morals and work ethics differ greatly here. What is right or feels good for some, will not be so for all.
Some of us are maybe too far towards the "work-a-holic" side, others feel that their lives as a whole and how fulfilling they are, are more important and that this is just another job.
Companies spend good money on us(I know some people feel under paid, but it beats the SHIT out of flipping burgers for $5 an hour, amiright?). I think that it's fair that employers want to see something tailored to them so they see exactly what they're investing in.
Most of the modern person's time during the week is spent at work, for game developers, probably a lot more. I know there are companies that work really hard to keep the work-life balance going, which is awesome and I highly endorse it, but ultimately you're going to have a crazy deadline at some point(though hopefully not very often) and you're going to have to go the extra mile. Doing art tests is going the extra mile, it shows passion, intiative and a willingness to show what you're capable of. You have to sell yourself.
We are all INCREDIBLY blessed to be able to do what we do and make money at it. Do you guys realize that? I've been doing this for a few years now and I STILL feel fortunate to do what I do for a living. I see people working at Wal-Mart and Gas Stations and any other number of (in my opinion at least) shitty jobs and I say, "Damn am I glad that I'm not there still, and man is all the hard work worth it to do something I love AND not have to be a starving artist."
I've done some art tests, some have gotten me interviews, some not. Some have gotten me jobs, some haven't. Every time I learn something, if not from some smattering of crit from the people who decided not to (or to) hire me, then from my friends who take a look at em when I'm done. It's all a learning experience. I've never gotten one that I felt was outlandish, so maybe I've been fortunate thus far. I've found all of them to be interesting, challenging and fun. It gives you, or should give you an idea of what you would be doing at the company from day to day. It gives you insight into how much you're going to enjoy working in the style the game you'd be working on is in.
I don't have low self-esteem about myself or my work, I get excited when I get an art test. I want to show them what I can do, I want them to see how interested I am in working there(I never just mass apply to companies). My goal is to knock them on their asses and make them want to reach through the monitor and hire me. Then again, I'm pretty competitive.
We all get to live our lives the way we see fit, you don't have to take a test for a company if you don't want to. You don't have to work in games if you don't want to, hell you don't have to work at all if you don't want to, everything is a choice. But, don't be shocked or offended if a place wants one to ensure they're making the right decision.